More record temps

[westwall]

Too bad you're so ignorant, davedumb, or you might already know that this trend started in the 1980's, not 14 months ago. Over that 10 year period (1980 -1989) the ratio of record hot days to record cold days was only 1.14 to 1. In the 90's the ratio rose to 1.36 to 1 and then in the first decade of the new millennium the ratio rose again to 2 to 1. In 2011 the ratio rose to 2.8 to 1. Now, for this year to date, we seeing a ratio of 14 to 1. If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even. Over 30 years of increasing high temperatures and decreasing low temperatures is quite definitely a reflection of a changing climate.

If you were as intellectually informed as you claim to be you would know that the current trend began around 1845-1850. But that would be science....and as we all know you don't do science. It interferes with your religion.

LOLOLOL....oh walleyedretard, why do you always embarrass yourself like this? You're the anti-science cult-nut with nothing but ignorant myths and stupid lies going for you.

The current trend of rising temperatures did indeed begin around mid 19th century after the first big pulse of fossil carbon was emitted during the industrial revolution. The trend of rising temperatures was unexpectedly interrupted in the 1950's, 60's and 70's and temperatures even declined just slightly. Scientists now know that this pause in global warming was caused by particulate and aerosol pollution from burning coal that blocked the energy from the sun, as well as creating other problems like acid rain. As aerosol and particulate emissions were regulated and reduced in America and Europe and other modern nations, but greenhouse gas pollution continued to increase, the cooling effect of the aerosols and high altitude particluates was overwhelmed by the greenhouse gases, and global warming resumed. This is reflected quite accurately in the analysis of record high temperatures versus record low temperatures in America. In the 1950's, the ratio between record highs and record lows was almost even at about 1.09 to 1. In the 60's and 70's, the ratios were actually opposite with record hot days being outnumbered by record cold days in a ratio of about 0.78 to 1. Then in 80's the decline in solar energy blocking pollution cleared the way for the accelerating trend of rising temperatures to continue. In the last decade, particulate and aerosol pollution from Chinese and Indian coal fired power plants has increased enormously and this pollution has once again somewhat suppressed the rise in temperatures for the last decade. Even with that suppression of the solar gain, temperatures have continued to rise and the decade from 2000 to 2010 ended up being the warmest decade on record and 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record. As the Chinese and Indians install better pollution control equipment and clean up their emissions from the current coal fired power plants, the resulting slight decrease in Earth's albedo will accelerate the global warming trend that is being steadily driven ever upward by the still rising CO2 levels.

They KNOW it? Do tell. Show us some peer reviewed articles explaining how that occured.

 

[Old Rocks]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1424.html

Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols
H. Damon Matthews
& Kirsten Zickfeld
Affiliations
Contributions
Corresponding author
Nature Climate Change(2012)doi:10.1038/nclimate1424Received 29 September 2011 Accepted 30 January 2012 Published online 04 March 2012


The climate response to scenarios of zero future greenhouse-gas emissions can be interpreted as the committed future warming associated with past emissions, and represents a critical benchmark against which to estimate the effect of future emissions1, 2. Recent climate-model simulations have shown that when emissions of carbon dioxide alone are eliminated, global temperature stabilizes and remains approximately constant for several centuries2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Here, we show that when aerosol and other greenhouse-gas emissions are also eliminated, global temperature increases by a few tenths of a degree over about a decade, as a result of the rapid removal of present-day aerosol forcing. This initial warming is followed by a gradual cooling that returns global temperature to present-day levels after several centuries, owing to the decline in non-carbon dioxide greenhouse-gas concentrations. We show further that the magnitude of the peak temperature response to zero future emissions depends strongly on the uncertain strength of present-day aerosol forcing. Contingent on the climate and carbon-cycle sensitivities of the model used here, we show that the range of aerosol forcing that produces historical warming that is consistent with observed data, results in a warming of between 0.25 and 0.5 °C over the decade immediately following zeroed emissions

 

[westwall]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

 

[daveman]

Well sure, you and your denier cult butt-buddies say that, but then you're all ignorant brainwashed retards with your heads wedged firmly up your asses so what you say is just meaningless noise. The world scientific community says that the current abrupt warming trend and the climate changes produced by that warming are definitely being caused by mankind's activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. Too bad you and your fellow cultists are too stupid and poorly educated to be able to understand the science or to realize how badly you've been duped by the people with a huge financial stake in selling fossil fuels.

See? Nothing but emotionalism. Thanks for proving my point.

It's like a twisted version of a Harlan Ellison novel:

"I Have No Facts, and I Must Scream"

Wait -- us conservatives hate science. What are we doing reading science fiction?

If you want to not read the science fiction story, it's not online here: I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

I loved that story when I first didn't read it as a kid.

 

[daveman]

Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible. The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.

You have been misinformed and misled on this subject.

2008 was the 12th warmest year on record for the last 160 years. 2009 was the 7th warmest year. No "cooling", you poor deluded dupe. 2010 was tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record.

Scientists have referred to both global warming and climate change for over three decades. The IPCC, or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was established in 1988, Mr Retardo.

Your ignorant opinions on the cause of the current abrupt global warming/climate changes are meaningless. The world's climate scientists, who actually know what they're talking about, are very clear that it is mankind's carbon emissions and deforestation practices that are driving this warming trend that is causing the climate changes.

The Earth's climate does go through long slow natural cycles but what is happening now is beyond the bounds of natural variability and is not part of any natural cycle.

And finally, you're wrong again, retard, the sun has entered a solar maximum period that is expected to peak in 2013. You're obviously a clueless idiot.

You forgot to tell him that global socialism is the only thing that can save us.

 

[daveman]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

And when the data do not fit the model, they do not change the model as demanded by real science.

They change the data. As demanded by their political agenda.

 

[RollingThunder]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

Oh please. You anti-science denier cult retards couldn't/wouldn't recognize "real fucking scientific work" if it bit you. You're all uneducated morons severely afflicted by the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

 

[westwall]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

Oh please. You anti-science denier cult retards couldn't/wouldn't recognize "real fucking scientific work" if it bit you. You're all uneducated morons severely afflicted by the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

When did you earn your PhD in a hard science buckwheat? I earned mine way back in the '70's at Caltech. What do you have? A GED?

 

[RollingThunder]

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

Oh please. You anti-science denier cult retards couldn't/wouldn't recognize "real fucking scientific work" if it bit you. You're all uneducated morons severely afflicted by the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

When did you earn your PhD in a hard science buckwheat? I earned mine way back in the '70's at Caltech. What do you have? A GED?

LOLOL....the only "PhD" associated with you, walleyed, stands for 'piled higher and deeper".

You've demonstrated conclusively many times on this forum that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, particularly in any area of science.

 

[Old Rocks]

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen’s description of the aerosol dilemma as a “Faustian bargain” has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries.

Now, in “Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols”, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide, are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":

Oh please. Give me some real fucking scientific work. Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless. Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want. They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"

Knowing that you don't read Nature, you should know that it is a peer reviewed scientific journal. You asked for a real scientific article, you got one. The fact that you wish to deny what real scientists have to say is just the norm for you.

 

[skookerasbil]

laugh...........my.............balls............off......................

Alaska about to set ALL TIME snowfall record!!!

News from The Associated Press

 

[Big Fitz]

See? Nothing but emotionalism. Thanks for proving my point.

It's like a twisted version of a Harlan Ellison novel:

"I Have No Facts, and I Must Scream"

Wait -- us conservatives hate science. What are we doing reading science fiction?

If you want to not read the science fiction story, it's not online here: I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

I loved that story when I first didn't read it as a kid.

Some of us read SF for entertainment.

Ecofascists try to live it for power.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

they need a board in the Conspiracy theory section for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?

 

[daveman]

It's like a twisted version of a Harlan Ellison novel:

"I Have No Facts, and I Must Scream"

Wait -- us conservatives hate science. What are we doing reading science fiction?

If you want to not read the science fiction story, it's not online here: I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

I loved that story when I first didn't read it as a kid.

Some of us read SF for entertainment.

Ecofascists try to live it for power.

Of course. They're victims of Magical Thinking.

 

[RollingThunder]

they need a board in the Conspiracy theory section for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?

Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "really don't understand" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.

 

[Meister]

they need a board in the Conspiracy theory section for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?

Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "really don't understand" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.

Running on emotion?

 

[RollingThunder]

they need a board in the Conspiracy theory section for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?

Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "really don't understand" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.

Running on emotion?

Reading the moronic bullshit posted by retards like you, I'm actually "running" on a mixture of disgust, horror, pity, amusement and despair over our obviously failed system of education that could produce cretins like you.

You, of course and as usual, are running on raw stupidity and massive ignorance.

 

[Meister]

Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "really don't understand" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.

Running on emotion?

Reading the moronic bullshit posted by retards like you, I'm actually "running" on a mixture of disgust, horror, pity, amusement and despair over our obviously failed system of education that could produce cretins like you.

You, of course and as usual, are running on raw stupidity and massive ignorance.

So it is emotion, huh?

 

[elvis]

Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "really don't understand" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.

Running on emotion?

Reading the moronic bullshit posted by retards like you, I'm actually "running" on a mixture of disgust, horror, pity, amusement and despair over our obviously failed system of education that could produce cretins like you.

You, of course and as usual, are running on raw stupidity and massive ignorance.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymbNKQWYKRM]Aerosmith - Sweet Emotion - YouTube[/ame]